Category: Marxism/Cultural Marxism

Reggie Smith Head of the CRCNA’s Race Relations Division;

2. What is the biblical evidence for kinists’ claims for racial separation? 

Kinists hold that God wanted to maintain distinctions. They look at Old Testament examples to demonstrate how God forbade interracial marriages between Israel and other nations, and they use this to justify the statement that God must also forbid interracial marriage today. Kinists use Genesis 1:25 and 11:7-9 to state that God mandated life based on kinship or relationships with people of “the same kind.”

Synod 2019 declared that this type of thinking is a heresy. It is incorrect to read these passages and say that God was concerned about ethnic background or skin color. Instead, the issue that God was expressing in these Old Testament passages was about keeping his people free of the detestable practices of other nations. Israel had to remain a faithful covenant partner to God alone and not be corrupted by their neighbors. In the New Testament, Christ broke down the wall of separation between Israel and other nations through the cross. For more information, see Acts of Synod 2019, p. 489-505.

1.) Here Reggie Smith faults Kinists for saying that “God wanted to maintain distinctions.” The obvious position for Reggie then is to insist that “God doesn’t want to maintain distinctions,” or perhaps “God doesn’t care about distinctions.” It is true that Kinists believe that God wants to maintain distinctions. It is also true that Kinists believe that people like Reggie believing that “God doesn’t want to maintain distinctions,” or, “God doesn’t care about distinctions” is the proof for the Kinist insistence that people like Reggie Smith are operating out of a Marxist world and life view. Consider that this idea that “God doesn’t want to maintain distinctions” is the exact same position that the Marxists have been aiming for since its inception as seen in the quotes now provided,

a.) ”What will be the attitude of communism to existing nationalities?

The nationalities of the peoples associating themselves in accordance with the principle of community will be compelled to mingle with each other as a result of this association and hereby to dissolve themselves, just as the various estate and class distinctions must disappear through the abolition of their basis, private property.”

~ Frederick Engels in “The Principles of Communism”, 1847

b.) “The equality of races and nations is one of the most important elements of the moral strength and might of the Soviet state. Soviet anthropology develops the one correct concept, that all the races of mankind are biologically equal. The genuinely materialist conception of the origin of man and of races serves the struggle against racism, against all idealist, mystic conceptions of man, his past, present and future.”

—Mikhail Nesturkh, Soviet anthropologist, 1959
“The Origin of Man” (Moscow)Mikhail Nesturkh, Soviet anthropologist, 1959:

c.) “The aim of socialism is not only to abolish the present division of mankind into small states and end all national isolation; not only to bring the nations closer together but to merge them….”

Vladimir Lenin
The Rights of Nations to Self Determination — pg. 76

d.) “… Just as mankind can achieve the abolition of classes only by passing through the dictatorship of the proletariat, so mankind can achieve the inevitable merging of nations only by passing through the transition period of complete liberation of all oppressed nations, i.e., their right to secede. “

Vladimir Lenin 
The Rights of Nations to Self Determination 

e.) “Even the natural differences within species, like racial differences…, can and must be done away with historically.” 

f.) “Full-scale Communist construction constitutes a new stage in the development of national relations in the U.S.S.R., in which the nations will draw still closer together until complete unity is achieved…. However, the obliteration of national distinctions and especially of language distinctions is a considerably longer process than the obliteration of class distinctions.”

Nikita Khrushchev

Thus, we see, that those like Reggie Smith are operating consistent with the Marxist playbook. Now Reggie Smith may not be a Marxist. He may just be stupid or ignorant. But either way, the fact that Kinists believe that God wants to maintain racial/ethnic distinctions has only been seen as somehow un-Christian since the rise of the Marxist fueled civil rights era.

2.) Instead of rehashing the Biblical argument for ethno-Nationalism I am providing a link below that gives a thorough Biblical case for Kinism. Reggie Smith, provided his intelligence doesn’t fail him, can see that the case extends far beyond the two passages he cites.

A Biblical Defense of Ethno-Nationalism

3.) As far as what CRCNA synod 2019 said, I can only quote the author of the book “The Jews and Their Lies.” Martin Luther said

“Unless I am convinced by the testimony of the Scriptures or by clear reason (for I do not trust either in the pope or in councils alone, since it is well known that they have often erred and contradicted themselves), I am bound by the Scriptures I have quoted and my conscience is captive to the Word of God. I cannot and I will not recant anything, since it is neither safe nor right to go against conscience. May God help me. Amen.”

(Reply to the Diet of Worms, April 18, 1521)

Currently, the NAPARC denominations as well as the CREC (Doug Wilson’s personally owned denomination) and the CRCNA (being in league with a even more liberal constabulary of churches) are, on the issue of race and the JQ, are overturning what the church has taught in all times and all places where it has been orthodox. When any Church body tacitly or expressly embraces Marxist egalitarianism, it is irrelevant what pronouncements they make as well as all the gravitas wherein they make said pronouncements. As Luther might well have said, “It is just so much farting in the wind.”

4.) As Reginald says, it is true that God broke down the wall of separation between Israel and other nations through the cross. However, the wall of separation the cross brought down was the wall that forbad the Gentiles from having access to the inner courts in the Temple that were accessible to Jews only. The whole idea of the walls being broken down is to communicate that people from every tribe, tongue, and nation now have access to the Spiritual blessings found in Christ. Reginald has made a category error. All because men from all races have access to the God’s presence doesn’t mean that all races are required to cease being races. Reginald, as well as countless other conceptually barren folks are teaching here, with their insistence that the cross eliminates previous distinctions, that grace destroys nature. The Cross of Jesus Christ eliminates all social, racial, and class barriers so that all men can flee to Christ. As is said, “The ground is even at the Cross.” However, that is a matter of grace. The even ground at the Cross does not mean that all areas of nature are flatten out to become a egalitarian’s delight. All the Fathers who were not Anabaptists or nutcase Covenanters understood this. Even the Dutch Reformed understood this.

“Nationalism, within proper limits, has the divine sanction; an imperialism that would, in the interest of one people, obliterate all lines of distinction is everywhere condemned as contrary to the divine will. Later prophecy raises its voice against the attempt at world-power, and that not only, as is sometimes assumed, because it threatens Israel, but for the far more principal reason, that the whole idea is pagan and immoral.

Now it is through maintaining the national diversities, as these express themselves in the difference of language, and are in turn upheld by this difference, that God prevents realization of the attempted scheme… [In this] was a positive intent that concerned the natural life of humanity. Under the providence of God each race or nation has a positive purpose to serve, fulfillment of which depends on relative seclusion from others.”

-Geerhardus Vos,
Biblical Theology

We should allow Calvin to chime in against Reginald Smith’s and the CRCNA’s Marxist views;

“Regarding our eternal salvation, it is true that one must not distinguish between man and woman, or between king and a shepherd, or between a German and a Frenchman. Regarding policy, however, we have what St. Paul declares here; for our, Lord Jesus Christ did not come to mix up nature, or to abolish what belongs to the preservation of decency and peace among us….Regarding the kingdom of God (which is spiritual) there is no distinction or difference between man and woman, servant and master, poor and rich, great and small. Nevertheless, there does have to be some order among us, and Jesus Christ did not mean to eliminate it, as some flighty and scatterbrained dreamers [believe].”

John Calvin (Sermon on 1 Corinthians 11:2-3)

We clearly see in all of the above that Reginald Smith, the CRCNA, NAPARC, the CREC are all anti-Christ in the Cultural Marxist agenda that they are promulgating.

It has been impossible to keep up with all the misrepresentation and slander that has been thrown in the direction of those who identify as Christians and not Marxists. Just recently I came across yet another slanderous piece written by the head of the Christian Reformed Church’s (CRCNA) head of race relations.  That piece can be located here though if you read it you’ll learn nothing about Kinism that is representative of what Kinists believe. It’s just another hack piece as coming from the pen of someone who has imbibed the spirit of the age.

I honestly don’t know if it is a case of low IQ that finds so many people so consistently misrepresenting Kinism or whether it is just a matter of people having been so thoroughly brainwashed on the subject of race realism that they just can’t get outside of their bubble. A third option is that these folks really have reinterpreted Christianity through a cultural Marxist grid. The chap who wrote this piece is a known quantity and I have pretty much concluded that on this subject he is just not capable of understanding what he is writing about. However, he is not the only one in the CRCNA who has slandered me, the Church I serve, and Kinism. There was a chap named Ken Bieber who served on the staff at the CRCNA church in Lansing, Michigan (at the time… that church has since left the CRCNA because they supported the LGBTQ cause in defiance of the denomination) who was quoted in a hit piece by the Lansing State Journal written years ago.

I am pursuing this all again in light of how the Southern Poverty Law Center, who at roughly the same time that the CRCNA was slandering the Church I serve and myself, has finally been exposed as a grifter organization thus giving credence to the truth that like the CRCNA, the SPLC slandered me and slandered the Church I serve.

The article linked above opens with this;

1. What is kinism?

Kinism is a movement that began in the early 2000s in the United States in some Reformed theological circles and churches. It espouses the belief that God has ordained separation of races in all areas of life. Quoting the theology of John Calvin, Abraham Kupyer, and Louis Berkhof, kinists believe that God, through Old Testament witness, rejected all interracial marriages. With this in mind, kinists would use the force of civil government to establish policies similar to apartheid in South Africa before 1994.

1.) Kinism has been around since for millennium. The Anthology books, “Who Is My Neighbor,” and “A Survey of Racialism in Christian Sacred Tradition” proves, in spades, that Kinism is just basic Christianity 101. As such Reggie Smith is just embarrassingly wrong when he writes that the Kinist movement began in the early 2000s in the US.

2.) Reggie Smith is correct though in noticing that Kinist quote from Calvin, Kuyper, Berkhof, Vos, Hodge, DeJong and a host of Reformed Christians. The reason we quote from these chaps is because these chaps were proto-Kinists, which is just another way of saying that they were Biblical Christians. Reggie Smith and the ilk that disagree with the Reformed Fathers are in no position to condemn Kinism as heresy unless they are going to be consistent (something not to be expected from these lowbrows) and condemn Calvin, Kuyper, Berkhof, Vos, etc. as being heretics. Given how far left Reggie is, he may well be willing to do that.

3.) It is not true that Kinism, as a variegated movement, rejects all inter-racial marriages. That is just a bald un-truth. I suppose that Reggie is a little sensitive about this issue since Reggie married inter-racially and apparently faced some disapproval at the time of his marriage from his now in-laws. It may be the case that some Kinists reject all inter-racial marriages, but it is not the case that all Kinists reject all inter-racial marriages. Since Reggie is writing about the movement as a whole when he makes this claim it is an errant claim. I have consistently said that while I think that, generally speaking, inter-racial marriages are unwise, I insist that once such a marriage is contracted the Church should do all it can to support such marriages apart from allowing their own children to enter into such marriages. The Church should also discourage such marriages.

3.) I run in Kinist circles. I know very few Kinists who would advocate the use the force of civil government to establish policies similar to apartheid in South Africa before 1994. This looks to be just a rhetorical ploy to make people scared of Kinism. What Kinist might do is press for legislation that puts an end to Hollywood and advertisers forever putting in our faces inter-racial marriages as if they are some kind of norm. If that much was done, we wouldn’t need the force of civil government since people just do not marry inter-racially on a large enough scale without the culture pushing it to have to be concerned that it will become a norm.

Keep in mind that Reggie Smith has been in error before when raising the specter of South Africa;

Setting the Record Straight … I Was Right Then, And I Am Correct Now – Iron Ink

There you have it. On just this first bullet point by Reggie Smith we see how errant the man is on the subject. There are four more bullet points that good old Reggie raises and we are going to see how he is errant on those as well. It might be said that Reggie Smith is as accurate in his reporting as the SPLC is accurate in their labeling of “hate groups.”